CPU throttling...

[BeerStore]

but...what is CPU throttling? I've read about intels to get a lot of that...what about amds? How can i see if my cpu is throttling? When does it occur?How does it look like?


<font color=green>it is never fast enough</font color=green>

 

[russell]

HERE IS A DEFINATION FROM WEBOPEDIA:

Short for input/output throttling, a technique used to more efficiently handle memory processing. During low-memory conditions, a system will slow down the processing of I/O memory requests, typically processing one sequence at a time in the order the request was received. I/O throttling slows down a system but typically will prevent the system from crashing.

 

[BeerStore]

thank you

<font color=green>it is never fast enough</font color=green>

 

[fishmahn]

CPU throttling is used on Intel CPU's to keep the chip from overheating under heavy load.

There are 2 versions (ver.1 and ver.2 amazingly enough ). Ver1 physically stops the CPU for a split second periodically to allow the cpu to cool off. That makes for a very jerky experience. Ver2 cuts cpu speed down for a split second instead of stopping the cpu completely. I think it cuts it to 2.8ghz instead of 3.something. It is supposed to only happen when the internal chip temp gets too hot. However there have been reports that it throttles up to 25% of the time on the fastest P4s due to said heat buildup.

Here's a google search on <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=prescott+cpu+throttling+3.8" target="_new">Prescott CPU throttling</A> so you can read some of the articles/posts yourself.

AMD's don't have the heat issues P4's do, so they don't throttle, afaik.

Mike.

 

[endyen]

Amd uses cpu throttling in Cool&Quiet. If there is no need for cpu speed, C&Q will slow the chip down, allowing slower fan speeds and keeping the chip cooler.

 

[jihiggs]

thats just for convinience though, not for protection.

this is my boomstick!

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Ver1 physically stops the CPU for a split second periodically to allow the cpu to cool off.

I don't know if I'd really say that it stops the CPU. It's more like while the processor is running under a PROC_HOT signal, the CPU will just skip cycles so that most of its components run idle that cycle, thus allowing it to cool down. So the CPU is still running just as fast as ever and still on the same cycle of x number of MHz / GHz.

That makes for a very jerky experience.

I've seen a few early P4s throttle and it has never been 'jerky'. It just gets slower. A user's experience is no different between running at 1GHz but skipping every other cycle and running at 500MHz using every cycle. You get the same number of cycles per period of time. The advantage of actual underclocking over just skipping cycles however is that when the CPU is actually running at a slower clock instead of just skipping cycles it uses even less power and thus generates less heat, so it is a faster way to cool the overheating CPU and theoretically can achive lower temps. (Though alternatively, once restored to full speed it will then heat up at a faster rate as well and still hit the same temps either way when unthrottled.)

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[fishmahn]

In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ver1 physically stops the CPU for a split second periodically to allow the cpu to cool off.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know if I'd really say that it stops the CPU. It's more like while the processor is running under a PROC_HOT signal, the CPU will just skip cycles so that most of its components run idle that cycle,

Dunno, to me that sounds like nothing is getting done, so although the clock is still ticking, the cpu is stopped mid-se


ntance, and continues a few ticks later.

Mike.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Dunno, to me that sounds like nothing is getting done, so although the clock is still ticking, the cpu is stopped mid-se

ntance, and continues a few ticks later.

If <i>nothing</i> was getting done then the neither would the clock tick, nor would the CPU know to stop throttling itself. There is a technical difference between having idle cycles and "physically stops the CPU". In fact, that's the point of the difference between ver1 and ver2, is that there is nothing physical about ver1. It's handled through firmware, not hardware.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[fishmahn]

Ok, I see you're going to nit-pick this one to hell... you have your, technically perfect way of putting it, when, to the layman consumer who doesn't care whether or not the clock actually ticks on or not, the CPU IS STOPPED!!!! No productive work is getting done during those ticks when the system is told not to do anything.

But if you want to nit-pick it to death, please do so.

Sheesh...

Mike.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Ok, I see you're going to nit-pick this one to hell... you have your, technically perfect way of putting it, when, to the layman consumer who doesn't care whether or not the clock actually ticks on or not, the CPU IS STOPPED!!!! No productive work is getting done during those ticks when the system is told not to do anything.

But if you want to nit-pick it to death, please do so.

Sheesh...

Besides the fact that attempting to educate a layman is one of the best ways to get an informed layman, the real nit-pick is that you specified that it "physically stops". First it isn't done't physically. Second it isn't stopped, it is idled. If you can't tell the difference between stop and idle then I hope that you never try to service a vehicle with what you believe to be a stopped engine. Just because you're not getting anywhere doesn't mean that the device has actually stopped.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[fishmahn]

And the difference in the amount of work performed at the end of the day is????? nothing.

And I'll continue to maintain that stopped is a perfectly adequate method of explaining it to someone without advanced knowledge of the internals of chips and chip design. Heck, I don't even want to know those fine of details, so your 'education' is wasted on me (and I design software for a living). I'm not a chip designer, and I'm not going to be a chip designer. And the person that really asked is probably even less interested (though I don't know that for certain).

I do know my father, who is quite amazed at the fact that his 3.8ghz P4 can't run at full speed all the time due to heat issues in his new PC. And to him, the CPU is stopped. I could explain it to him the way you do, and he'll say, like I'm saying, that you're still picking at worthless nits.

If the Truck isn't moving, it's stopped. If the engine is still ticking over, the engine isn't stopped, but the truck is. If some portions of the CPU are running (the engine so to speak) and there is still no data being crunched (the wheels aren't turning on the pavement) the CPU isn't getting any 'work' done, it's stopped.

Sink in yet?

Mike.

 

[TheRod]

AMD produce less heat, so they are less prone to throttling! This is quite a simple answer.

Just to add that what is causing a lot of heat is when gates are changing state, let's say a bit got from 1 to 0 or 0 to 1. So, throttling by speed reduce the switching in the cpu core and heat.

Or you can send an intruction to the CPU that will ask it to not compute for the next few cycle, this reduce heat too!



-
A7N8X / <font color=green><b>Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green> <- <i>Is this affecting my credibility?</i>
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Radeon 8500 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290 <- <i>It's enough for WoW!</i>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

And the difference in the amount of work performed at the end of the day is????? nothing.

See, now you're just being silly. What does the amount of work performed <i>at the end of the day</i> have to do with a description of what throttling is? Perhaps ... "nothing"?

And I'll continue to maintain that stopped is a perfectly adequate method of explaining it to someone without advanced knowledge of the internals of chips and chip design.

Hey, if you want to sound stupid, that's your choice of course. I'm just doing my duty to ensure that your bad choice of words isn't perpetuated.

Heck, I don't even want to know those fine of details, so your 'education' is wasted on me (and I design software for a living).

1) It wasn't for your education. It was for the education of anyone who read your misguided choice of words to prevent the perpetuation of nonsense.
2) If you design software for a living and you have that little concern about how the hardware that runs your software works then I feel sorry for anyone who uses your software as it is bound to be unoptimized, if not worse.

I'm not a chip designer, and I'm not going to be a chip designer.

From what I can tell based on what you have said, that is a <i>very</i> good thing. Right now I'm worried that you're even a programmer.

I do know my father, who is quite amazed at the fact that his 3.8ghz P4 can't run at full speed all the time due to heat issues in his new PC.

1) People whom do not research before purchase reap what they sow. Would you buy a house without an inspection of the house and neighborhood? Would you buy a car without even so much as a test drive? Would you take a vacation without looking up information on the destination and the hotel? A little research goes a long way.

2) If he had any kind of waranty he could get that fixed. If he didn't have a waranty (or didn't care about the waranty) and if you were any good with a computer you could easily fix his problems.

If the Truck isn't moving, it's stopped. If the engine is still ticking over, the engine isn't stopped, but the truck is. If some portions of the CPU are running (the engine so to speak) and there is still no data being crunched (the wheels aren't turning on the pavement) the CPU isn't getting any 'work' done, it's stopped.

1) A throttled PC is never "stopped". It may be doing less work than its potential, but if it were "stopped" then it would no longer be throttling at all.
2) I would consider your assumption that the layman (your father included) cannot possibly fathom the concept of an idling engine as particularly insulting to those people. Do you really assume that people in general are that stupid? Or perhaps are you just willing to stick your foot into your mouth so far that your toenails never need clipping before admitting that you made a poor choice of words?

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[fishmahn]

Ok, you win. Your anal retentiveness exceeds mine.

Replace the word 'physically' with 'effectively' in my original post. Are you satisfied yet? Didn't think so. Too bad.

I'm not going to stoop to insults like you obviously have.

Mike.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Ok, you win. Your anal retentiveness exceeds mine.

Is "anal retentiveness" hyphenated?

Replace the word 'physically' with 'effectively' in my original post. Are you satisfied yet? Didn't think so. Too bad.

Actually, the surrealistic quasi-like implication of "effectively" works quite adequately IMHO. See how easy that was? It was hardly worth all of your foot-in-mouth disease now, was it?

I'm not going to stoop to insults like you obviously have.

Right. As if insinuating that my inability to agree with your believed correctness of your mistake was in fact dimwittedness with the comment "<font color=red>Sink in yet?</font color=red>" was not you stooping to insults. As if the apparent level of my respect for you wasn't an intentional decline in a direct proportion to the lack of respect in your own words. Or, for that matter, as if direct observation and soundly based postulation are in fact even insults. Didn't you know that being so thin skinned that people know what you ate for lunch doesn't actually give you any moral superiority? Or is your horse too high up for you to see that?

Face the simple truth. If you try to play games with me you simply can't win. So the only logical route is to simply not play those games. Perhaps you would find then that no one even needs to win in the first place.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[fishmahn]

Actually, the surrealistic quasi-like implication of "effectively" works quite adequately IMHO.

Mighy white of you.

Mike.

PS: I used to have some respect for you. Since you don't have any for me, we're pretty much the same there.

 

[Starfishy]

At risk of getting involved in a lovers quarrel here... I think that you are being a little extreme here slvr_phoenix. Although you are right in your explanation, I do think the previous defintion was good enough for the average reader. That's not to say that you couldn't have corrected him, but to call him and members of his family incompetent may have been going a little far, I don't know if we want too much flaming in here. I think you could try to be a little more civil.

Alright, so I've opened myself up for a bashing now, so let me have it.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

At risk of getting involved in a lovers quarrel here...

Two's company. Three's <i>even better</i>. :O

I think that you are being a little extreme here slvr_phoenix.

Without those willing to journey to the extremes how would we ever know where our boundaries lie?

Although you are right in your explanation, I do think the previous defintion was good enough for the average reader.

Good enough for the average reader to appreciate that it is a problem? Sure. However, technical innacuracies have a way of spreading and growing into things that they are not. What seems innocent enough at first may in fact have considerable connotations later. So it's best to just catch these things where one can by providing more accuracy. Since this was a response to a question asked by someone wanting to learn the truth in a technical forum, it seemed inappropriate to let a possibly shaky foundation upon their processor education be set.

That's not to say that you couldn't have corrected him, but to call him and members of his family incompetent may have been going a little far

I agree that calling him and members of his family incompetent would be going too far. I'd appreciate the notice that I said no such thing. I don't believe that I even implied it beyond any boundaries previously defined by his own words.

I don't know if we want too much flaming in here.

I don't know either. As much as I disliked the olden days when this forum was a bonfire on petrol fumes, the current state of affairs has grown to be rather boring in its own right, which is almost as bad. What is life without even a tiny little bit of excitement? That aside, as stated, I never even so much as implied anything beyond observations made from his own words. It's not my fault that his own words worked so well against him.

I think you could try to be a little more civil.

I <i>know</i> that I could <i>try</i> to be a little more civil. Sometimes I even do try. Today I just happened to be bored. :O

Besides, I happen to think that I was rather civil up unto the point where disrespect was laid upon me. It started out as a friendly enough constructive correction.

Alright, so I've opened myself up for a bashing now, so let me have it.

I believe that you do me a disservice. Have I not always treated others with the same respect that I am shown? You have been quite good natured in being a voice of reason for the benefit of all. I have not even the hint of an inclination to bash you for that.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[Starfishy]

Ok, well... I must say that I am very happy that you didn't "rip me a new one" for getting involved. And I guess that if you think we needed a little "spice" in the forum and you thought this was a good way of bringing that to be, this is also ok.

I am just a little concerned that some of what you say might be “taken to heart”... I know that I wouldn't like it if you called my father uneducated. Not everyone has the computer "know how" that we on this forum do. And to say that he shouldn't buy if he is uneducated is somewhat of a harsh statement, in fact I think many people buy many things without knowing all the facts of what they are buying. For example I just bought a new second hand car, and I really don't have any idea how the intricacies of the cruise control work, nor do I know if my cruise control works to the same efficiencies of other car manufacturers. I guess I should have done more research into the internal electronics of my latest purchase... is this what you would suggest??

 

[fishmahn]

If this comment is an insult as your obviously superior intelligence was insulted by it...

the comment "Sink in yet?" was not you stooping to insults.

Then this certainly was an equal insult that predates the one you claim started the whole thing.

then I hope that you never try to service a vehicle with what you believe to be a stopped engine.

But of course, since you said it, it couldn't be an insult.

Grow up a little, child.

Now, please entertain us further with your obviously superior intelligence.

Mike.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

I know that I wouldn't like it if you called my father uneducated.

Again, you're taking things much further than my actual words. I said, "People whom do not research before purchase reap what they sow."

And to say that he shouldn't buy if he is uneducated is somewhat of a harsh statement

And I didn't say anything even remotely close to that. All that I said was that if you drop thousands of dollars into a single purchase and don't look up or ask around for any information on it then if your purchase turns out to be a lemon you only have yourself to blame for your sticky situation.

I guess I should have done more research into the internal electronics of my latest purchase... is this what you would suggest??

No, and I think you're intentionally trying to take this to extremes now. If you'll read, I specifically covered that already with, "Would you buy a car without even so much as a test drive?" I didn't say, "Would you buy a car without learning the technical intricacies of the cuise control electronics?", now did I? I said research, as in look into, get an informed opinion of, etc. I never even loosely implied to write a post doctorate dissertation on every technical intricacy.

For example, there's already quite a bit of information about Intel's recent CPUs having heat problems, and especially their fastest. Even a little tiny bit of surfing the net or asking a PC technician would reveal that much.

When you bought your car did you know anything about the manufacturer? Did you know anything about the model? Did you see it in operation and/or test drive it? Did you ask anyone about the car? Did you look up anything about it?

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

Now, please entertain us further with your obviously superior intelligence.

Ask and ye shall receive. We here at the Silver Phoenix Group aim to please.

Then this certainly was an equal insult that predates the one you claim started the whole thing.

You enjoy being wrong, don't you? That must be it...

Fisrt of all I never claimed that it started the whole thing. I merely did a very quick search to find an example.

Second of all for someone who claims to be involved in software design, you seem to have no concept at all of simple conditional statements. I said "<b>If</b> you can't tell the difference between stop and idle <b>then</b> I hope that you never try to service a vehicle with what you believe to be a stopped engine." So then the only way to be offended by that would mean that you in fact <b>can't</b> tell the difference. So <b>can</b> you tell the difference between a stopped engine and an idling engine? The difference there is that I gave you an option. You lent me no such courtesy. Therefore the insults are in fact <i>not</i> equal. You do understand the conditional operation of not, don't you?

Thirdly, while we're on the subject of predating, let's look at the hostility that you portray in an even earlier post where amongst other things you resort to yelling ("<font color=red>CPU IS STOPPED!!!!</font color=red>") and rude flippancy ("<font color=red>Sheesh...</font color=red>").

Grow up a little, child.

Funny, for someone who talks so big you sure are wrong an awful lot. Mayhap thou shouldst take consideration of thine own visage first?

That aside, you are in fact partially correct in that I do tend to enjoy indulging my inner-child in acts such as provoking spoilt brats with superior attitudes resulting from inferiority complexes to see to what extremes they will go. I do love it so.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[fishmahn]

I knew you would rise to the occasion.

The difference there is that I gave you an option.

You had an option to... You could have said yes, and you could have said no. You chose no. Therefore, there is no difference.

I do tend to enjoy indulging my inner-child in acts such as provoking spoilt brats with superior attitudes resulting from inferiority complexes to see to what extremes they will go. I do love it so.

So do I. Now the question is, can you convince me that I'm the 'spoilt' (isn't it spelled 'spoiled'?) brat? And superior attitudes... aahhh, yes, superior attitudes... Looking in the mirror ... you should try it.

Please rise again.

Mike.

 

[slvr_phoenix]

I knew you would rise to the occasion.

Wow. You must have amazing powers of pattern recognition to have identified something that obvious. Phoenix? Hello? I'm <i>ever</i> so impressed.

You had an option to... You could have said yes, and you could have said no. You chose no. Therefore, there is no difference.

1) For someone who is trying to nit-pick typos, you really should learn the difference between "too" and "to". I'll readily admit that I make typos, spelling, and gramatical errors on occasion. But then I don't stoop to pointing out other people's such mistakes unless they clearly deserve such a base response.

2) For someone who claims to be a software designer you really <i>don't</i> seem to understand conditional statements very well at all. <i>I</i> gave a condition proir to the alleged insult which allowed what followed to be either rejected or accepted. <i>You</i> put your insult in the form of a question where the answer had no effect upon the veracity of the implication. In other words, you gave no condition.

3) As stated earlier, you seem to really enjoy being wrong a lot. See above and below.

Now the question is, can you convince me that I'm the 'spoilt'

Whatever makes you think that this is about convincing you? I'm merely providing entertainment to the general populace here at THGC, and I highly doubt that many of them need any convincing at all. As for you, you're the last person that I care about convincing.

'spoilt' (isn't it spelled 'spoiled'?)

Simply: No. Entertainingly: Your grasp of the English language is clearly as renowned as your software programming prowess. I direct you to <A HREF="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=spoiled" target="_new">these</A> <A HREF="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=spoilt" target="_new">links</A>.

And superior attitudes... aahhh, yes, superior attitudes... Looking in the mirror ... you should try it.

I never said that I don't have a superior attitude. It happens to stem from a nasty habit that I have of being right. Unlike you however I seem perfectly capable of recognizing and admitting my many flaws.

Please rise again.

I <i><font color=red>am</font color=red></i> a phoenix. Rising again is what we do. :O

That aside however, my weekend starts in about five minutes. <i>If</i> I happen to catch back up on this sometime Monday <i>then</i> maybe we can rejoin this delightful pastime. In the interim however I will likely be absent, as I have things to see, people to do, and so forth, or some such. Enjoy. And do please take your time so that your next response can actually address all which you have casually ignored so far, as if I wouldn't notice that particular trend.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>